Based on the spec the price of 6D should be very close to D600. However, you know recently Canon's price is not good. Thus, I would guess the price of 6D will be about 2500.

Nikon D600 only had 9 out of the 39 AF points are cross type, so if the rumor Canon 6D get the 7D AF, 19AF point will be all cross type. IMHO, 10 more cross AF point had more significant advantage over the 2MP and 1FPS disadvantage... so the question is the price.

Have a nice day.

How many Canon users (or expert photographers) would give up the (chanche to use the) precious Canon White (or black) Lenses for a few hundred dollars / euros?

I think it's not only the price. Upgraders from APS-C will find Nikon offering much easier to take. Imagine if you're invested in DX (AF-S) glasses. You can still take D600 and little by little upgrade your lenses. It's besides the fact that it's offering it at almost the same price of 5D2. Wow!

I can't se why buying FF to use it in crop mode, it is something I have never understood. Sometimes it can be useful cropping an image, but if i had to spend 2200 to buy d600 and using allways in crop mode, i would go for d7000 and some good glass.Diego

A major part of the manufacturing cost is the sensor, large sensors are exponentially more expensive than smaller ones. With today's sensor manufacturing technology a full-frame camera cannot approach the price of an APS-C camera.

I've heard somewhere that 60% of an entry level full-frame camera manufacturing cost is the sensor, and for these even lower cost cameras it's probably more.

I think it's not only the price. Upgraders from APS-C will find Nikon offering much easier to take. Imagine if you're invested in DX (AF-S) glasses. You can still take D600 and little by little upgrade your lenses. It's besides the fact that it's offering it at almost the same price of 5D2. Wow!

I just wonder how many people will actually use the crop mode over a long period of time? For example, a user who own a D3200 with quite a number of DX lens decided to upgrade to D600 while he'll slowly upgrade to FX lens... then suddenly realized in DX mode, he only had 10MP on D600 while his old D3200 had 24MP... hmm... I'm not sure about others, but for me, I'll not be very happy during the transition time. If I'm a Nikon user ready to upgrade to a FF DSLR, I'll first upgrade all my len to FX lens before getting a FF DSLR.

So, for me, a FF DSLR offering a crop mode is not attractive at all, unless when using crop mode, the FF DSLR can achieve a much higher frame rate then that's another story.

I think it's not only the price. Upgraders from APS-C will find Nikon offering much easier to take. Imagine if you're invested in DX (AF-S) glasses. You can still take D600 and little by little upgrade your lenses. It's besides the fact that it's offering it at almost the same price of 5D2. Wow!

I just wonder how many people will actually use the crop mode over a long period of time? For example, a user who own a D3200 with quite a number of DX lens decided to upgrade to D600 while he'll slowly upgrade to FX lens... then suddenly realized in DX mode, he only had 10MP on D600 while his old D3200 had 24MP... hmm... I'm not sure about others, but for me, I'll not be very happy during the transition time. If I'm a Nikon user ready to upgrade to a FF DSLR, I'll first upgrade all my len to FX lens before getting a FF DSLR.

So, for me, a FF DSLR offering a crop mode is not attractive at all, unless when using crop mode, the FF DSLR can achieve a much higher frame rate then that's another story.

Have a nice day.

Not many of course but still the path remains for APS-C upgraders. Not everybody takes the path that we are taking (lens first before body). But at least the choice is still there. I'm also not saying it's an important feature, but at least Nikon cares for those upgraders.

Also the extra reach albeit reduced IQ for DX mode is important for some (bird and action photogs). I know, it can be achieved in post-processing but still the reduced post-processing time is a welcome one.

Canon doesn't just set their prices based on the (supposed) superiority of a competitor's product. They set prices based on their own production costs.

I'm quite sure you're wrong here - their production costs have nothing to do with it, I doubt they can even figure them out considering the r&d involved that has to be returned, too. The price is simply as high as they can get away with it w/o loosing too much market share, and whey the early adopters got the products they'll lower the price according to demand (that might be official or vendor rebates, too).

Well, 1/4000s certainly is enough for 99% of my shots. The 5d series only has 1/200, too - doesn't matter much because of hss though. But no afma is rather impertinent on a camera with this price tag, I guess it's cut to prevent people buying 3rd party lenses that often need adjustment.

The real question is: What would you buy for the same price - a 6d with a new 24-70 mk2 or a 5d3 with a Tamron 24-70? Yeah, right. But this is just theory because the 5d3 will freefall once enough quantities of the 6d are on the market and it isn't too crippled.

And-Rew

I find the specs for this camera impressive, and the price - both of which should cause Canon some concerns.

To me, this very much takes the mantle away from the 5D2 - and certainly puts pressure on the 5D3.

Yes, I know the 5D2 is 4 years old etc - but even now it is still the benchmark that is used to judge the current releases by.

The price of this camera is slightly less than where the 5D3 should be - which would then have left it killing the competition dead in the water - but instead, Canon have opted to scare off a lot of potential customers and fans by creating these ridiculous prices for their newer kit. Technology prices are supposed to get cheaper - but not in Canon's case, it is most definitely bucking a very long trend without any supporting evidence except greed!

so the cheapest d600 i can find for the UK is £1800($2900) which is £300 less than for the 5dm3, that's not exactly the "cheap entry FF" price tbh, I know it'll drop but I would have considered switching to nikon at a cheaper price!

If Canon wants to respond with a hypothetical "6D", they don't have as much room to manoeuvre as Nikon. From what I gather, the full frame sensor is certainly a major component of the cost of producing these cameras; so Canon doesn't have a lot of opportunity to undercut the D600, even if they wanted to. They would certainly struggle to match the D600's specifications, because that would make the "6D" too similar to the 5D MkIII. I'm afraid that I have to agree with some of the previous posters on this thread: we'll see a situation very similar to the 60D vs. D7000, where Canon simply introduces a lower specified competitior for the same (or more) money...

Technology prices are supposed to get cheaper - but not in Canon's case, it is most definitely bucking a very long trend without any supporting evidence except greed!

Economists tell us there's nothing wrong with greed.

But concerning tech advance, if everything would keep getting cheaper a tech company would be selling everything for $100 in some time. Instead they re-invest the money saved from tech advance into better products - and the 5d3 would have been if it'd have had the price of the 5d2 on release.

so the cheapest d600 i can find for the UK is £1800($2900) which is £300 less than for the 5dm3

All now products have an early adopter's premium on it, the d600 will drop a couple of hundred whatever after a few month and you'll get better prices from competitive dealers once enough d600 are on the shelves.